Catching up from a couple weeks ago, I just wanted to add my short-
short version of explaining Proportional Representation that usually
gets a good response from people:
"A 20% group should get 20% of the seats."
It's pretty easy for people to be agreeable to that. I think in
general it might be easier for people to be agreeable to goals of
election reform, and relatively few actually care to analyze the
mechanics of how it works. If they are interested in the mechanics,
they usually just want to understand it enough to feel they wouldn't
be cheated by a mysterious system. Explaining it to the point of, "oh
yeah, that sounds reasonable" is often enough.
Depending on the audience, it might even be better to say that a 10%
group should get 10% of the seats. Many US Green Party people would
love that.
Another 'goal' statement I like to use:
"I want to vote for candidates, not parties."
I think a fair number of people have heard vague ideas about how in
some places you vote for a party and the party fills in seats with
people depending on how many they get allocated. I don't trust party
machines even when it's "my" party, so I want to vote directly for
candidates. STV allows this, and I like that (never mind its warts,
we'll figure out better ways that also allow candidate voting).
Anyway, those are my pithy two bits for the PR debate for now.
----
Election-Methods mailing list - see http://electorama.com/em for list info
